Request for extending a parser (or Reporting a bug of parser)

Sometimes you will find u-ctags doesn't make a tag for a language
object unexpectedly. Writing a patch for making the tag is
appreciate. However, you may not have time to do so. In that case, you
can open an issue on the GitHub page of u-ctags.

U-Ctags just captures the definitions of language objects. U-ctags
has an infrastructure for capturing references for language objects.
However, we implement reference tagging limited area. We will not
work on writing new code for capturing references for your favorite
language. About requests for capturing reference tags, we will say
"patches are welcome.".

What kind of language objects u-ctags captures is controlled by
--kind-<LANG> option. Some kinds are disabled by default because we
assume people don't want too large tags file. When you cannot find a
language object you want in a tags file, it is worth for checking the
status of kinds. --list-kinds=<LANG> or (--list-kinds-full=<LANG>)
option lists the status of the given language.

Wildcard * is for enabling all kinds of a language at once.
--kinds-C++=* option enables all kinds of C++ parser. If you specify all
as the name of <LANG>, you can enable all kinds of all languages at once.

If you explain the expectation about how tags related functions of vi
and its plugins, U-ctags developers don't understand it.
The answer from them can be "it can be a bug of vi."

U-ctags developers know the programming language that you are talking.

U-ctags developers need your help to understand the meaning of
language object you asked tagging especially about kind. A person
extending a parser have to decide a kind of newly tagging language
object: reusing an existing kind or introducing a new kind.
U-ctags developers expect a report know the concent kind, field,
and extra. ctags.1 man page of u-ctags explains them.

English is the native language of the head maintainer.

I don't want to write this but I have to write this.
Following are my private request for reporters.

Instead of long explanation, showing code or output
examples make me understand what you want.

Don't omit sentences. Please, write your sentence
in full.

Use pronounce fewer.

U-ctags can generate something meaningful from a broken input.

From garbage, u-ctags generates garbage.
For a syntactically broken input source file, U-ctags
does not work well. U-ctags developers will not work
on improving u-ctags for handing such input.
The exception is that macro related input. Well known
one is C and C++.

Following a tuple with three items helps us to understand what you want.

Input file

A shorter input file is better. However, it must be syntactically
valid. Show the URL (or something) where you get the input
file. It is needed to incorporate the input file to the u-ctags
source tree as a test case.

Command line running u-ctags

Expected output

These three items should be rendered preformatted form on an issue
page of GitHub. Use triple backquotes notation of GitHub's
markdown notation. I will close an issue with a bad notation
like this issue.